The Historical Foundation of it All UPDATED

I'm so sorry for the delay in getting this post written. With school, life, and preparation for a trip to Scotland, things sort of got away from me. In fact, I'm currently typing this up on a delayed plane bound for Newark, hoping and praying that I am able to make my connecting flight to Glasgow, Scotland. I figured I could pass the time by typing this up.
Well, on our last episode, we discussed the theological foundations of psychotheology. Today's post will discuss the history of psychotheology. This could get kind of long. Part of the reason this has taken so long to write is that I haven't quite been sure of the perspective to take with this. Do I speak more of the history of psychological perspectives on theology, or do I speak more about the theological perspectives on psychology? I have decided to do a bird's-eye sweeping survey of the topic at hand, so as not to bog anyone down by meaningless details such as the idiosyncratic views of individual psychologists or theologians, or the development of views. In other words, I'm hoping to make this brief; if I do not, I'm sorry. Okay, here we go . . .

Psychological Views on Theism
Basically, the reigning view of psychology on religion (especially Christianity) is what one would expect: "religion" as a whole is what is used by individuals to help them get through life and relieve the natural tensions that human beings have by their very nature. We fear dying, so we believe in an afterlife. We can't accept the faults of our fathers who claim to be our superiors, so we create a perfect father figure who is worthy of the homage he desires. We don't like the behaviors of a group on the fringes of society, so we make their behaviors "wrong" under the mantle of religion to justify our wiping them out or ostracizing them. We desperately feel like doing right, but we fell like we must have an organized system where we get something back for doing what is right, so we create a structure around our morality so that we can feel better about ourselves. Does it sound like I'm getting it right?
This is why most research done on religion is on the topic of "religious coping," or, the process by which people use religion to get through the pains of life.
Many psychologists, especially the most influential ones through history have said that religion must be replaced by a more "rational" system of abstract coping. Psychology has spent much of its existence attempting to fill this hole, much to the apparent degradation of psychological health and well being in America and the world.

Theological Views on Psychology
When it comes to this topic, there are two main schools of thought: the Integrationists and the Non-Integrationists. The Non-Integrationists are generally the more conservative Christians who believe that all "Christian Psychology" is an attempt to take the opinions and views of secular, unsaved, unredeemed, non-Christian people, and conform Christianity to them. They believe that Christians must come up with an independent particularly Christian perspective and system of psychological thought completely separate from the views of secular psychologists. The Integrationists, on the other hand, believe that all truth is God's truth, so a Biblical view of Psychology can accept the findings of Non-Christian psychologists as true for human behavior, Christian and non-Christian.
I am a Biblical Integrationist. I believe that truth is truth no matter what human happened to observe it first. But, I do believe that all truths (if they are in fact true) will be 100% in line with what the Bible says. Now, before certain cries of dissent arise, I must say one thing about the Bible: The Holy Bible is 100% the very literal Word of God as written through the filter of human perspective, emotion, and life. This means that the Bible is absolutely to be taken literally for all theological issues having to do with the nature of God and man and means for salvation, but in the process of the writing of the book, certain approximations, hyperbole, metaphor were used (e.g. The Bible describes the sun rising and setting; we know this is not the case. We move about the sun, not vice versa.) Thus, I do not mean to say that the Bible must explicitly say “Freudian Psychoanalysis is wrong” in order for me to think that, but if the picture of human nature that the Bible paints is different from that which Freud has painted, then I am under good authority to cast off Freud as a crock. I do this understanding my own fallibility, though, always being willing to read and research more and more and be shown wrong. If that be the case, as has happened on many occasion in my life, I take that not as a failing of the Bible, but as a failing of my understanding of it. Some will say this is a cop out. I say that the Bible has proven itself far more trustworthy in my life than I have ever shown myself to be, so I'll put all my eggs in that basket.

Conclusions
Needless to say, Religion and Psychology have not had the best of relationships historically. They both have spent most of their times wanting to cast off the other and replace it as the reigning worldview on the nature of man.

So, can these seemingly opposing forces coexist peacefully and perhaps actually enhance the experience and knowledge of the other? I think so. For several reasons:

(1) At their most basic level, all the sciences merely describe the observations made of processes and phenomena preexisitng in the world and in man. It is the "what," if you will. Theology helps provide the orgins thereof and the purpose for which these were done. At its most basic form, it is the "why." These are very simplified, I know, as there are genuine advancements, creations, and inventions that aren't necessarily already preexisting (though one could argue they do, but in the mind of God; but that's for another time).

(2)This explanation sort of jumps in the deep end of the pool. Just please try and follow. Being a Christian doesn't mean that I need to believe that all other religions and worldviews are all wrong; rather, where said religions/worldviews disagree with Christianity, I believe them to be wrong, and Christianity to be right. It is in this sense that a very important philosophical idea is brought forth. Most every religion/worldview has something "godly" and/or "right" to offer. I believe this is because all humans are designed with essentially the same basic needs, to be fulfilled and answered by God chiefly. Furthermore, I believe this God has designed us to desire and seek our fulfillment of those things designed to be satisfied by Him and only Him. That being said, the various religions/worldviews seek to fulfll the same ends as Christianity. The only difference lies in the fact that Christianity proclaims it is the chief structure thorugh which God has revealed His desired path to Him for man. Thus, all other religions/worldviews may have good/right ideas, but they as whole systems are in a sense "out of focus" with the truth. Christianity is every revealed trut in perfect focus in how it should be. Those other "goods" and "rights" expressed elsewhere are merely shadows of the truth, with Chritianity being the object the light is shining upon. Psychology reveals truths and knowledge about humans beings that are revealed most perfectly in focus by Christianity. They are complimentary, or at least can be.

(3) Think of the search for understanding of man and his processes as a picture slowly being painted, analyzed, and interpretted. Both psychology and theology can and do take turns playing artist in forming the picture, with the other performing as art historian, if you will, explaining the underlying sources, meanings, inspirations, and intentions inherent in the work. They play off eachother.

(4) The view of man put forth in the Bible is exactly what both studies and expereince have shown to be true.

(5) Lastly, to pretty much put in different words once more what the last three points have said (which essentially have all been the same thing), the two are perfectly complimentary to eachother with the animocity rising from the individual adherents to each views ratehr than the ideas themselves. For example, in psychology, every therapist generally chooses between two different therapy perspectives: the interpersonal-relational perspective, or the therapist-client perspective. one sees the patient as basically healthy needing understanding and relationship to stop there bad habits, while the other views the patient as a sick individual that the great and wise therapist must bring them out of; no actual personal relationship should be established, as it will tarnisht he therpay. SO whic one is right? Well, studies show what is the best way, and the Bible shows this as well. Proverbs 20:5 says, "The purpose in a man's heart is like deep water, but a man of understanding will draw it out."

I just want to end this post with a preemptive rebuttal to the most common refutation I have heard and will hear: You can't mix a hard science like psychology with an abstract spiritually abstract and nebulous thing like theology. I have three simple points:
(1) Many, perhaps most will argue over psychology's "hard science"-ness, but for the sake of argument, I will lean towards the side of psychology as science more than psychology as philosophy.
(2) Unlike every other branch of science out there (all just as compatible with biblical Christianity, I might add, but that's another time), psychology is unique in that no matter the biological factors behind it all, the fact still remains that nearly all of those factors actually exhbit themselves in abstract, nebulous, and (do I dare say it?) spiritual forms. Cognition, emotion, spirituality, coping, love, relationship, pathology, and pain certainly are manifested in very real, but very abstract forms and terms that go beyond mere chemical reactions. It is in this that theology can primarily reside, though it has some to say about human chemical balances, imbalances, and healing thereof.
(3) The view of man put forth in the Bible is exactly what both studies and expereince have shown to be true.

God bless and please send questions I can answer; it's so tiring trying to anticipate all that people will try and say because, contrary to much psychological belief, human beings can't be predicted.

Just a little psychohumor there. Enjoy.

--paul